Comparative Study On Testees’ Metacognitive Strategy Use In Paper-Based And Computer-Based English Reading Tests

With the widespread applications of multimedia network in modern Englishteaching, the web-based testing system or teaching platform have been pilotedrespectively in some colleges and universities to measure students’ ability of Englishreading. However, compared with the traditional paper-based English reading test, whileproviding test-takers superior objective conditions, the computer-based test puts forwardnew demands and challenges. Since the establishment of the network test system in2008, a considerable number of the students who have participated in this kind ofcomputer-based language testing respond that they are so uncomfortable with the newtesting form that the results obtained may not reflect their true English level. What ismore, the new testing form can also bring them psychological fear in comparison withpaper-based test. Out of consideration for minimizing the adverse effects ofcomputer-based EFL reading tests and for the purpose of promoting the development ofnetwork tests, this research explores from the test-takers’ perspective the non-Englishmajor students’ differences in metacognitive strategy use in paper-based andcomputer-based EFL reading test as well as the causes of such differences.The subjects in this study are non-English major sophomores from ChongqingUniversity with a total number of184, all of whom have participated in thecomputer-based EFL reading tests in the past year. The study involved two kinds oftests--paper-based and computer-based EFL reading tests, and a questionnaire survey.Each test contained4reading passages with20associated multiple choice questionswhich were all taken directly from the CET4released ten years ago. All the subjectsfinished first in40minutes the paper-based EFL reading test in the traditional classroom,then the computer-based test in the self-access foreign language learning center inanother40minutes, and the metacognitive strategy use questionnaire at last in10minutes. The questionnaire adopted here was from the part of metacognitive strategyuse in State Reading Strategy Questionnaire by Aek Phakiti (2008), with small alterationdue to the difference of the testing media. After the basic data collections of thequestionnaire and the test were confirmed,123valid subjects were divided into threegroups--group1(subjects who disapprove of computer-based EFL reading test), group2(the neutral group), and group3(subjects who are in favor of computer-based EFLreading test) in accordance with their average scores of the reading habits, which lays a foundation for the grouping of metacognitive strategy use in the data analysis. Aftercompleting the data analysis of paired samples t-test, ANOVA as well as correlationanalysis, the face-to-face interviews with6subjects from group1and2from group2were carried out in order to further explore and confirm the causes of the differences inmetacognitive strategy use in the process of paper-based and computer-based EFLreading tests.The results of the experimental data and the individual interviews indicate that thecomputer-based English reading test would exert an effect to some extent on thesubjects with different reading habits in such aspects of metacognitive strategy asplanning, monitoring and evaluating, but the main influencing factors come from theunfamiliarity of computer and the maladjustment for the new mode of computer-basedEnglish reading. Although the majority of the subjects prefer paper-based reading tests,the overall test scores escape the impact of testing media. The impact brought about bythe unfamiliarity of computer would disappear as soon as they get used to the newtesting form.To minimize the adverse effects of the computer-based EFL reading test, the authorproposes the following suggestions according to the problems found in the present study:First, teachers may guide students more often to do English reading exercises oncomputer, so as to reduce their anxiety level in computer-based reading. Secondly, thereis a need for the CBLT designers to optimize computer-based answering ways as well aspresenting form. Third, it is better for teachers to consciously inculcate students withknowledge of metacognitive strategies, and conduct training in the new computer-basedtesting environment for students to cultivate their ability of metacognitive strategy use.